Christian Conciliation: An Alternative to Ordinary ADR – Part 3

,
Christian Conciliation: An Alternative to Ordinary ADR – Part 3

Endnotes


Guiding People Through Conflict

Guiding People Through Conflict
A succinct summary and application of biblical conflict resolution principles for those trying to assist other people who are struggling with conflict.
$5.95

more info

* Member of the Alabama State Bar.  J.D. 1990, The University of Alabama School of Law.  Mr. Waddell, formerly Southeast Regional Director for Peacemaker Ministries, is a partner with Wallace, Jordan, Ratliff & Brandt, L.L.C. and an adjunct professor at the Cumberland School of Law.  The authors acknowledge the invaluable assistance provided by David R. Mellon, a recent graduate of the Cumberland School of Law.** Member of the Maryland State Bar.  J.D. 1986, Catholic University, Columbus School of Law.  Ms. Keegan is Director of the Alabama Center for Dispute Resolution, established by the Alabama Supreme Court and housed at the Alabama State Bar.

1 Chief Justice Warren Burger, Annual Report on the State of Judiciary, A.B.A. J. 68 (March 1982).

2 See, e.g., Alabama United Judicial System Annual Report for 1997, at 24 (reporting that “Alabama circuit courts again reported record case filings in FY 1997”).  1998 statistics also report an increase in filings from 1997.

3 For a discussion of these and other alternative dispute resolution tools, see Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model, at 9-12 (2d ed. 1998) (Alabama State Bar Committee on Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution).

4 Richard C. Reuben, The Lawyer Turns Peacemaker, 82 A.B.A. J. 55 (August 1996).

5 See Monica Warmbrod, Could an Attorney Face Disciplinary Actions or Even Legal Malpractice Liability for Failure to Inform Clients of Alternative Dispute Resolution?, 27 Cumb. L. Rev. 791 (1996-1997); Stuart M. Widman,  Attorneys’ Ethical Duties to Know and Advise Clients About Alternative Dispute Resolution, The Professional Lawyer, ABA Center for Professional Responsibility, 1993 Symposium, at 18.

6 For a discussion of the development of ADR in Alabama, see the Alabama State Bar publication Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model, supra note 3, at 7.  See also William D. Coleman, Alabama Supreme Court Commission on Dispute Resolution, 59 Ala. Law. 236 (July 1998).

7 There are a number of publications containing specific examples of how well Christian conciliation works.  Ken Sande, The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide To Resolving Personal Conflict (2d ed. 1997); Lynn R. Buzzard & Laurence Eck, Tell It To The Church (1985).

8 Institute For Christian Conciliation, Guidelines for Christian Conciliation 1 (rev. 3.8 1989) [hereinafter Guidelines].  A copy of the Guidelines can be obtained from Peacemaker Ministries, PO Box 81130, Billings, MT 59108.  Christian conciliation will be referred to as “Christian conciliation” or “conciliation” in this article.

9 See, e.g., Matt.  18:15-17 (setting forth steps for personal reconciliation); Lev. 19:17 (encouraging personal confrontation).

10 See Buzzard & Eck, supra note 7, at 57-58; Judith M. Keegan, The Peacemakers: Biblical Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation as a Model Alternative to Litigation, Mo. J. Disp. Resol. 11, 16 (1987).  Mr. Eck, now deceased, was Director of the Albuquerque CCS.

11 See Keegan, supra note 10, at 16; Anne Bachle Fifer & Gary Friesen, History of Christian Conciliation Service and Peacemaker Ministries (1998) (unpublished memorandum, on file with the Cumberland Law Review).

12 See Keegan, supra note 10, at 16; Fifer & Friesen, supra note 11.

13 See Fifer & Friesen, supra note 11, at 1.

14 CLS is a “Partner in Peacemaking”, a program established by Peacemaker Ministries. Ken Sande, founder of Peacemaker Ministries and founder of the CCS of Montana, is scheduled to be the keynote speaker for the CLS 1999 annual conference.

15 See Fifer & Friesen, supra note 11, at 2.

16 The Rules of Procedure for Christian Conciliation are found at Part IV of the Guidelines for Christian Conciliation discussed extensively infra.  Information on the CTP can be found on the internet at www.Peacemaker.net.

17 Fifer & Friesen, supra note 11, at 2.  The ICC continues to provide “conflict coaching, mediation, and arbitration services to resolve church and business disputes, lawsuits, and family conflicts.” Guidelines, supra note 8, at preface.  The ACCS ceased to exist on the date of the merger.

18 Guidelines, supra note 8, at preface; see also Glenn G. Waddell, Making Peace in Alabama, 59 Ala. Law. 244 (July 1988) (discussing the purpose and activities of Peacemaker Ministries).

19 As of December 30, 1998, there were 631 people enrolled in Peacemaker Ministries’ Conciliator Training Program.  Letter from Annmarie Hamling, ICC Conciliator Training Administrator, to Glenn Waddell (January 4, 1999, on file with the Cumberland Law Review).

20 There are approximately one-half dozen conciliation organizations still in existence.

21 Fifer & Friesen, supra note 11, at 2.

22 Keegan, supra note 10, at 12.  According to Mr. Eck, “[m]ost programs associated with the [CCS] charge[d] minimal ‘;filing fees’ and depend largely on contributions for the operation of the basic program.”  Buzzard & Eck, supra note 7, at 147.

23 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 1.  The authors have served pro bono in conciliation cases, but that is not their general practice.

24 Id.

25 Wayne Flynt, Alabama Baptists: Southern Baptists in the Heart of Dixie 18-19 (1998).

26 See, e.g., C.R. & S.R. v. E.__, 573 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991) (considering an arbitration award in a case administered by the CCS of Central Florida).

27 Letter from Annmarie Hamling, supra note 19.  For purposes of this article, the Southeast includes Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee.

28 The opportunities for conciliation in Alabama are legion.  As an example, a Birmingham newspaper recently published a lengthy article about one man’s fight to quiet a barking dog in his neighborhood.  See Nick Patterson, A Long Dogfight: Neighbors Feud Over Years About Barking of Pets, Birmingham Post-Herald, Apr. 25, 1998, at C-1 (describing anonymous letters, an electric shocking collar, surgical removal of a dog’s vocal cords, allegations of dog poisoning and the filing of charges against the dog’s owner).   The Alabama Dispute Resolution Foundation, established recently by several Alabama attorneys and businessmen, has been well received in the State.  See Roy L. Williams, Foundation: Avoid Court, Resolve Disputes by Mediation, Birmingham News, Apr. 1, 1998, at B-1; see also Coleman, supra note 6 (describing the establishment of the Alabama Supreme Court Commission on Dispute Resolution in 1994); Judy Keegan, The Alabama Center for Dispute Resolution, Inc., 59 Ala. Law. 237 (July 1998) (discussing the Alabama Center for Dispute Resolution).

29 The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary 166 (1989).

30 Black’s Law Dictionary 262 (5th ed. 1979).

31 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 1.  The ICC defines a “conciliator” as one who serves as a “conflict counselor, mediator, or arbitrator.”  Id.

32 By “ordinary”, the authors mean the ADR methods most commonly utilized by attorneys and others involved in litigation or disputes headed toward litigation.  For reference purposes, these methods and associated standards are those described in Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures, supra note 3.  Although the authors believe Christian conciliation is the most effective dispute resolution tool, they generally support the ADR methods described in that publication as well.

33 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 10.

34 Fisher and Ury, in their classic text on negotiation, clearly state that their method of “principled” negotiation “represents practical, not moral advice.”  Roger Fisher & William Ury, Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In at x (2d ed. 1991); see also Karon O. Bowdre, Law Practice: A Place for Moral Values, 57 Ala. Law. 158 (May 1996) (discussing the role of moral values in the practice of law).

35 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 2.  For example, Christians are discouraged from pursuing litigation against other Christians in most circumstances.  As stated by the Guidelines, “[g]enerally, Christians are not free to sue other Christians, at least not until they have exhausted the process that Jesus sets forth in Matthew 18:15-20 and I Corinthians 6:1-8.”  Id. at 4.

36 Id. at 3.

37 Id. (quoting Matt. 7:12).

38 Id.  Christian conciliation is available to non-Christians, so long as they respect the Christian principles underlying the process and agree to submit their dispute to conciliation.

39 For a discussion of other faith-based ADR programs and historical precedents to conciliation, see Keegan, supra note 10, at 14-16.  The most prominent example is the Bet Din, or Jewish Rabbinical Courts.  See also Lynne M.L. Fitzgerald, Mediation: A Systematic Alternative to Litigation for Resolution of Church Employment Disputes, 5 St. Thomas L. Rev. 507 (1993) (discussing the history of the church in resolving disputes and a 1969 proposal for each Catholic diocese to establish a Council of Conciliation).

40 Keegan, supra note 10, at 21.

41 Id.  at 11 (Rule 5 of the Rules of Procedure for Christian Conciliation [hereinafter ICC Rules or ICC Rule]).

42 See id. at 14 (ICC Rule 22).

43 Id.

44 Id.  at 15 (ICC Rule 24).  The parties must agree that the arbitrators can consider any information received during mediation as though it were received during arbitration.

45 Id. at 16 (ICC Rule 40B).

46 The ICC recommends the use of conciliation clauses and provides a sample conciliation clause in Part III of the Guidelines.  The enforceability of these clauses is discussed infra in the text accompanying notes 64-131.

47 See, e.g., Wisconsin v. Burns, 332 N.W.2d 757, 772 n.8 (Wis. 1983) (Abrahamson, J., dissenting) (inaccurately characterizing CLS as a group of attorneys who “do not believe in the adversary system” and who have formed conciliation service centers “to foster their philosophy”); Cherna v. Cherna, 427 So. 2d 395, 396 n.2  (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) (describing conciliation as a “novel dispute resolution method”).

48 E.g., Allen E. Gerenscer, Family Mediation: Screening for Domestic Abuse, 23 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 43, 49 n.37 (1995); Jill Richey Rayburn, Neighborhood Justice Centers: Community Use Of ADR—Does It Really Work?, 26 U. Mem. L. Rev. 1197, 1201-05 (1996); Leonard L. Riskin, Understanding Mediators’ Orientations, Strategies, and Techniques: A Grid for the Perplexed, 1 Harv. Negotiation L. Rev. 7, 21 n.51 (1996); Marietta Shipley, Family Mediation in Tennessee, 26 U. Mem. L. Rev. 1085, 1092 (1996).

49 53 F.Supp.2d 1101 (D. Colo. 1999).

50 The parties had placed in their contract the shorter version of the standard ICC conciliation clause, reprinted in footnote 64 below.  Encore Publications, Inc. v. PromiseKeepers, 53 F.Supp. 2d 1101 (D. Colo. 1999).

51 Id. at 1112.

52 Id. at 1112-13.

53 620 A.2d 1161 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).

54 Miller v. Miller, 620 A.2d 1161, 1168 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).

55 See id. at 1162.

56 See id.

57 See id. at 1163-64.  Compare In re Marriage of Ryan, 222 Mont. 188, 190 (Mont. 1986) (finding that the trial court properly took into account the recommendations of the CCS of Montana in rendering a child custody decision); Woodlands Christian Academy v. Logan, No. 09-97-348-CV, 1998 WL 257002 (Tex. Ct. App. May 21, 1998) (discussed infra) (declining to enforce a conciliation clause against a non-signatory).

58  573 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991).

59 See C.R. & S.R., 573 So. 2d at 1088-89.

60 Id. at 1088 (quoting CCS of Central Florida, Inc. Rule 11).

61 See id. at 1089.

62 Id.  The court relied upon a Florida statute which required reporting of suspected child abuse in addressing the public policy question.  Fla. Stat.  Ann. § 415.504 (West 1989).  In dicta, the court questioned whether the payment of $250,000 should stand, describing the arbitration proceeding as “void.”  C.R. & S.R., 573 So. 2d at 1089.

63 ICC Rules allow the conciliator to “divulge appropriate and necessary information . . . when compelled by statute or a court order . . . [and when the conciliator] deems it necessary to contact appropriate civil authorities to prevent another person from being harmed.”  Guidelines, supra note 8, at 14 (ICC Rule 16D).

64 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 8.  As an alternative, the ICC suggests the following concise restatement of the above clause: “Any claim or dispute arising from or related to this agreement shall be settled by mediation and, if necessary, legally binding arbitration in accordance with the Rules of Procedure for Christian Conciliation of the Institute for Christian Conciliation.  Judgment upon an arbitration decision may be entered in any court otherwise having jurisdiction.”  Id.

65 See Kahn v. Terry, 628 So. 2d 390 (Ala. 1993).

66 E.g., Morrison Restaurants, Inc. v. The Homestead Village of Fairhope, Ltd., 710 So. 2d 905 (Ala. 1998) (discussed infra in the text accompanying note 129).  Between January 1 and December 31, 1998, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled on the enforceability of arbitration clauses in at least 34 cases, one of which was Morrison and none of which involved a Christian conciliation clause.  From January 1, 1999, through August 20, 1999, the Alabama Supreme Court issued 36 additional opinions on arbitration.

67 The Christian conciliation cases are Encore Productuons, Inc. v. Promise Keepers, 53 F. Supp. 2d 110l (D. Colo. 1999) and Woodlands Christian Academy v. Logan, No. 09-97-348-CV, 1998 WL 257002 (Tex. Ct. App. May 21, 1998) (not designated for publication) (discussed infra in the text accompanying note 96).  See also Miller and C.R. & S.R., discussed supra in the text accompanying notes 54 through 62 (declining to enforce certain aspects of arbitration decisions issued under a conciliation process, but for reasons unrelated to the Christian nature of the process).

68 In Med/Arb, “parties begin with mediation and go straight to binding arbitration if they have not been able to come to agreement during the mediation session.”  Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model, supra note 3, at 10.

69 The members of this organization are Fortune 500 corporations which have pledged to try to resolve disputes through alternatives to litigation.

70 A Drafter’s Guide to CPR Dispute Resolution Clauses (rev. 1998), Model ADR Procedures and Practices Series, New York.  Available in book form or at www.cpradr.org.  Also, see samples provided by the American Arbitration Association at their web site, www.adr.org.

71 Id.

72 How Contract Clauses Can Ensure ADR, vol. 15, No. 10, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, 146, 152 (1997).

73 Tim Klintworth, The Enforceability of an Agreement to Submit to Non-Arbitral Form of Dispute Resolution: The Rise of Mediation and Neutral Fact-Finding, 1995 J. Dispute Resol. 181, 188 (1995); see also Lucy V. Katz, Special Issue on Alternative Dispute Resolution, Enforcing an ADR Clause—Are Good Intentions All You Have?, 26 Am. Bus. L.J. 575 (1988).

74 See AMF, Inc. v. Brunswick Corp., 621 F. Supp. 456 (E.D. N.Y. 1985) (likening the advisory opinion process to arbitration).

75 See DeValk Lincoln Mercury Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 811 F.2d 326 (7th Cir. 1987) (describing the appeal process as “mediation” although no such term was used in the contract).

76 See Annapolis Firefighters v. City of Annapolis, 642 A.2d 889 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1994).

77 Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(c)(9) (including 1993 advisory committee notes).  See also the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998, P.L. 105-315.  This Act requires the federal district courts to authorize the use of ADR in all civil actions, adopt local rules, provide for the confidentiality of ADR processes and prohibit disclosure of related confidential communications.

78 Ala. Code § 6-6-20 (Supp.  1998).

79 See supra note 76, at 890.

80 53 F.Supp.2d 1101 (D. Colo. 1999).

81 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 8.

82 PromiseKeepers, 53 F.Supp.2d at 1106.

83 ICC Rule 42 states:  “[s]hould these Rules vary from state or federal arbitration statutes, these Rules shall control except where the state or federal rules specifically indicate that they may not be superseded.”  Guidelines, supra note 8, at 17.

84 PromiseKeepers, 53 F.Supp.2d at 1113-19.

85 Guidelines, supra note 8 at 11, 16.

86 PromiseKeepers, 53 F.Supp.2d at 1111.

87 As an example, “This Agreement shall be subject to and construed under the laws of the State of Colorado, to the extent such laws do not conflict with or contradict the parties’ agreement to resolve any claim or dispute arising under or related to this Agreement pursuant to the Rules of Procedure for Christian Conciliation.”

88 Carl Gregory Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. v. Barnes, 700 So. 2d 1358, 1360 (Ala. 1997).

89 Ex parte Bentford, 719 So. 2d 778, 780 (Ala. 1998) (quoting from Capitol Inv. Group, Inc. v. Woodson, 694 So. 2d 1268, 1270 (Ala. 1997)) (citing AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Communication Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643 (1986)).

90 Ex parte Beasley, 712 So. 2d 338, 340 (Ala. 1998).

91 728 So. 2d 592 (Ala. 1998).

92 Id. at 595.

93 See id.; cf. Ex parte Grant, 711 So. 2d 464 (Ala. 1997) (reversing an order compelling arbitration because document containing the arbitration clause was not a valid contract).

94 See Ex parte David Dickinson and Sandra Dickinson, 711 So. 2d 984 (Ala. 1998).  See also PromiseKeepers, supra note 81 (holding subcontractor was not bound by conciliation clause); Ex parte Steve Rush and Kim Rush, 730 So. 2d 1175 (Ala. 1999) (holding agreement can be evidenced by conduct rather than signature).

95 See Ex parte Dyess, 709 So. 2d 447 (Ala. 1998).

96 See Woodlands Christian Academy v. Logan, No. 09-97-348-CV, 1998 WL 257002, at *3 (Tex. Ct. App.  May 21, 1998).

97 See Matt. 5:37 (“Simply let your ‘;yes’ be ‘;yes,’ and your ‘;no’ be ‘;no.'”).

98 Allied-Bruce Terminix Co., Inc. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265, 281(1995) (emphasis added), cited in Delta Constr. Corp. v. Stephen Gooden, 714 So. 2d 975, 980 (Ala. 1998).  The grounds must relate to the arbitration provision itself, not generally to the contract.  The federal doctrine of severability treats the arbitration clause as if it were separate from the rest of the contract.  See Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395 (1967).

99 See Ex parte Napier & Godfrey, 723 So. 2d 898 (Ala. 1998).  But see Ex parte Dorothy B. Foster, No. 1972306, 1999 WL 632555 (Ala. Aug. 20, 1999) (holding that financial hardship and inequality of bargaining power does not make an arbitration agreement unconscionable).

100 See Anniston Lincoln Mercury Dodge v. Conner, 720 So. 2d 898 (Ala. 1998).

101 See Ex parte Williams, 686 So. 2d 1110 (Ala. 1996).  The court did not specifically rule on the validity of the subject contract in Williams, but recognized that the incapacity of the person signing the contract containing an arbitration provision may be grounds for the avoidance of arbitration.

102 Gibson v. Neighborhood Health Clinics, Inc., 121 F.3d 1126 (7th Cir. 1997). Applying Indiana common law, the court held there was no contract because there was no consideration.  Although the employee had agreed to arbitrate, there was no reciprocal promise by the company to arbitrate in the “Understanding” that the employee signed.  The court agreed that there was an employer promise in the handbook, but she did not receive the handbook until after she had signed the Understanding.  Continued employment did not constitute consideration for the employee’s promise.

103 See Meyers v. Terminix Int’l Co., 697 N.E.2d 277 (Ohio 1998).  The Alabama Supreme Court may have found differently.  For a discussion by that court of reduced AAA fees for consumers, see Ex parte Dan Tucker Auto Sales, Inc., 718 So. 2d 33 (Ala. 1998).

104 See Ex parte Napier & Godfrey, 723 So. 2d 49 (Ala.  1998).

105 Id. at 52.

106 Id. at 52.

107 Id. at 53.

108 Henry C. Strickland et al., Modern Arbitration For Alabama: A Concept Whose Time Has Come, 25 Cumb. L. Rev. 59, 63 (1994).

109 Stanley D. Bynum et al., The Supreme Court’s Decision on Terminix Reaffirms the Scope of the FAA, 50 AAA Dispute Resol. J. 8 (April/June 1995); Henry C. Strickland, Allied-Bruce Terminix, Inc. v. Dobson: Widespread Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements Arrives in Alabama, 56 Ala. Law. 238 (July 1995); Strickland et al., supra note 108.

110 9 U.S.C. § 2 (1994).

111 The FAA excludes from its coverage “contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of worker engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.”  9 U.S.C. § 1.  The Alabama Supreme Court has narrowly limited the section 1 exemption to seamen, railroad workers, and other workers actually involved in the interstate transportation of goods.  See, e.g., Robert Frank McAlpine Architecture, Inc. v. Heilpern, 712 So. 2d 738 (Ala. 1998) (finding that an architect is not the class of worker to be excluded from FAA coverage); accord O’Neil v. Hilton Head Hosp., 115 F.3d 272 (4th Cir. 1997).

112 Ala. Code § 8-1-41(3) (1975); Garikes, Wilson & Atlinson, Inc. v. Episcopal Found. of Jefferson County, Inc., 614 So. 2d 447 (Ala. 1993).

113 Allied-Bruce Terminix Co., Inc. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265 (1995).

114 Allied-Bruce Terminix Co. v. Dobson, 628 So. 2d 354, 356 (Ala. 1993)

(applying the “substantial contemplation test”), rev’d, 513 U.S. 265 (1995).

115 See Allied-Bruce Terminix Co., Inc. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265 (1995).

116 Bynum et al., supra note 109 at 14.  Under the “commerce in fact” standard, an arbitration clause is enforceable if the transaction in fact involves or affects interstate commerce.

117 See e.g., Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24-25 (1983) (cited in Ex parte McNaughton, 728 So. 2d 592, 594 (Ala.  1998)).

118 Terminix, 513 U.S. at 270.

119 See Southland Corp. v. Keating, 465 U.S. 1 (1984).

120 Terminix, 513 U.S. at 277; see also Strickland, supra note 109 at 239 (noting that  “involving commerce” is the same as “affecting commerce” under Terminix).

121 Strickland, supra note 109 at 240.

122 See discussion of PromiseKeepers and this issue in the text accompanying note 87, supra.

123 694 So. 2d 1285 (Ala. 1997).

124 See id. at 1288 (citing Ex parte Warrior Basin Gas Co., 512 So. 2d 1364 (Ala. 1987)).

125 See id.  The clause covered “all disputes… concerning the vehicle, its sale or lease, and its condition, including disputes concerning the terms and conditions of the sale or lease, the condition of the vehicle, any damage to the vehicle, the terms and meaning of any of the documents signed or given in connection with the sale or lease, any representations, promises or omissions made in connection with negotiations for sale or lease of the vehicle. . . .” Accord, PromiseKeepers, supra note 80 (noting broad language of conciliation clause).

126 Merrill Lynch v. Kirton, 719 So. 2d 201 (Ala. 1998).

127 Id. at 204.  The Court in this case cites two pages of cases dealing with breadth of arbitration clauses.

128 Ex parte Gates, 675 So. 2d 371, 374 (Ala. 1996).  Note that this language is very similar to the language suggested by the ICC.

129 710 So. 2d 905 (Ala.  1998).

130 Id. at 907 (citing Companion Life Ins. Co. v. Whitesell Mfg., Inc., 670 So. 2d 897, 899 (Ala.1995)).

131 Ex parte Hood, 712 So. 2d 341 (Ala. 1998).  Justice Maddox writes a very convincing dissent, with the concurrence of Hooper and See.

132 See supra note 63.

133 Guidelines, supra note 8,  at 14 (ICC Rule 16A).

134 “Administrator”  is defined as any individual or organization that provides or facilitates conciliation.  Guidelines, supra note 8, at 10 (ICC Rule 3A).    If a case is administered by the ICC, this term encompasses both the ICC and the conciliators.

135 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 14 (ICC Rule 16D).

136 The Alabama Code of Ethics for Mediators similarly contains a confidentiality exception “where required by law . . . .”  Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures, supra note 3, at 47 (Standard 6).

137 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 14 (ICC Rule 17).

138 This passage is actually one of the foundational passages for teaching biblical conflict resolution.  When a Christian is offended, he or she is required to: (1) talk to the other party in private; (2) bring in one or two others if the other party refuses to listen; and (3) tell it to the church if the other party refuses to listen to the “one or two others.”  Matt. 18:15-16; see generally Sande, supra note 7.

139 Guidelines, supra note 8, at 14 (ICC Rule 21).

140 E.g., Matt. 18:15 (requiring an offended party to go first to the offending party privately); Eph. 4:29 (exhorting believers to speak only words of edification); I Tim. 5:13 (condemning gossip).

141 Ninety-five percent of Alabamians claim an affiliation with the Christian faith, seventy-two percent profess to be “born again,” and sixty-seven percent state that they “regularly” attend church.  (Statistics from a September 1997 poll conducted by independent polling firm Wirthlin Worldwide, based in Alexandria, Virginia).

Back to Part 1Back to Part 2
 

 

Skills

Posted on

February 16, 2015